ML20125D264

EDO Procedures Manual

ML20125D264
Person / Time
Issue date:	11/30/1992
From:	NRC
To:
References
NUREG-BR-0072, NUREG-BR-0072-R02-S2, NUREG-BR-72, NUREG-BR-72-R2-S2, NUDOCS 9212150073
Download: ML20125D264 (51)

Text

' '

f UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I

,4 l E00 PROCEDURES MANUAL, NUREG/BR-0072, REVISION 2 DATEISSUED- '

SUPPLEMENT NUMBER 2

_ November 1992 flung INSTRUCTIONS PAGES TO BE REMOVED NEW PAGES TO BE INSERTED PART PAGE NUMBER DATE PART PAGE NUMBER DATE 1 5, 6, 11, 12 Au9 1990 1 5, 6, 11, 12, Nov. 1992 13, 14, 15, 16 13, 14, 15, 16 17, 18 17, 18 VIII 1 thru 39 Feb. 1991 VIII 1 thru 39 Nov. 1992 IX 7, 8 Au9 1990 IX 7, 8 Nov. 1992 O

w 9212150073 921130 PDR NUREG BR-OO72 R PDR I

3 research; budget, administration, personnel. The technical writer /

editor writes, edits, and produces NR&C, inhouse employee newsletter,

[% r and performs other writing and editing tasks for the EDO and EDO staff as assigned. .

R0PM - Assists the DEDR in the supervision and overview of regional, NRR and RES activities, including monitoring day-to-day activities, reviewing compliance with Agency policies and programs, and evaluat-ing organizational effectiveness; monitors development of and reviews headquarters office policy, procedures, and instructions; and assists the DEDR in developing and managing the implementation of agency-wide policy and programs.

ACB/EDO - reviews and processes all communications addressed or referred to the ED0; serves as liaison with SECY on the coordination of principal correspondence, etc.; functions as central control point for all correspondence within OEDO and all the offices reporting to the EDO.

C. Working with OEDO t

'N 1. A0/EDO may be contacted for guidance in regard to specific issues assigned to staff (usually the WITS or " green tickets"), general guidance on how to proceed in regard to dealing with EDO or the Commission, or in regard to interoffice coordination. He is the point of contact to advise of Commission or Congressional contacts.

He is available for any questions related to this manual or which relate to staff procedures.

D. EDO RULEMAKING AUTHORITY

1. General

a. In attempting to reduce the number of relatively minor items on which it must act, the Commission has directed that the EDO exercise fully the rulemaking authority delegated to him in 10 CFR 1.31(c). That section authorizes the EDO to develop and I-5 g NOV 1992

4 promulgate proposed and final rules, subject to general policy guidance from the Comission except those:

• involving significant questions of policy, or

• involving the-following 10 CFR Parts except for proposed or final rules in these parts that do not raise policy issues or are of a corrective nature: 7 (Advisory Comittees); 8 (Interpretations); and 9 Subpart C (Government in the Sunshine Act Regulations).

involving Part 2 where any of the following Offices fail to concur: OGC, ASLAP, or ASLBP.

b. For purposes of general guidance, a rule is considered to involve "significant questions of policy," and therefore must be submitted to the Comission if it:

• represents a major change in existing Comission policy,

• represents a major new issue, or O

• will result in a major commitment of resources by a class of licensees.

Factors to consider in determining if a rule is considered to involve "significant questions of policy" are:

• the impact on licensees and the public,

• The degree of controversy associated with the proposal,

• the existence of significant public health,. safety, environmental or comon defense and security questions, NOV E

recommendations concerning the rule:aking along with the sponsoring Office a

Director's recommendations to the EDO. The EDO will then decide whether or not to proceed with the rulemaking and inform affected offices of the decision. This process is repeated once each year for ongoing rulemakings.

F. Timeliness of NRC Rulemaking Associated with the rulemaking review and approval process established on February 13, 1984 EDO initiated by memo of June 12, 1985, a rulemaking tracking and feedback system to help manage the timeliness of rulemaking.

The purpose of this system is to ensure that rules under the ED0's purview are finalized within about 2 years of their inception. See Exhibit 4 for detailed procedures.

G. Timely Resolution of Petitions for Rulemaking (PRM)

By EDO memorandum dated August 13, 1986, the EDO established procedures to ensure that the resolution of a petition for rulemaking is accomplished on a timely basis. These procedures were modified by EDO memorandum dated April 6, 1988, to clarify the difference between " resolution" and " closure" s / of a PRM. All PRMs must be resolved no later than 12 months from the date of publication in the Federal Register of the notice of receipt of the PRM, rather than tha date of receipt by the NRC. A PRM is considered

" resolved" when the lead program office to which the PRM is assigned has determined what regulatory decision will be made on the PRM. A PRM is considered " closed" when the NRC formally grants or denies a petition and publishes a notice of this action in the Federal Register and advises the petitioner in writing. See Exhibit 5 for details.

H. Reculatory History Rulemaking Procedures BY EDO memorandum of April 5,1985, " Regulatory History Procedures,"

procedures were established for the creation of a regulatory history of each proposed and final rulemaking initiated by the offices reporting to the EDO. See Exhibit 6. The objective of the regulatory history is to ensure that all documents of central relevance to a particular rulemaking I-11 NOV 1992 i

are identified and accessible and to facilitate the resolution of any i

s issues that may arise concerning the interpretation of a particular regulation. Further information on these procedures'is included in the NRC Regulations Handbook, NUREG/BR-0053.

I. Daily Staff Notes 1.

Purpose:

To provide the Commission with a daily report of significant events. See Exhibit 7.

2. Scope: Reported items should include issues of sufficient importance that the Commission wculd find it valuable to be advised promptly and/or that a record should exist that the Commission was notified. Ertries should be brief; if necessary, they can be followed up in detail in the Weekly Information Report or by means of a separate paper if there is significant new, important, or updated information that is important to pass on.

3. Details of Reporting

a. All offices / Regions will submit reports as required. Negative report is required from Program Offices only.

b. Offices / Regions transmit typed reports via electronic transmission to A0/EDO by 9:30 a.m. daily using format shown in- Exhibit 8.

c. Reports should be concise -- a sentence (several at the maximum) -- for each item. Use "who, what, when, why, where" criteria to assure clarity. See Exhibit 8 for a sample,

d. Examples of possible input:

CP/0L/FES issuance or important related activities

(

i O NOV 1992 I-12 l

L e

I

,3 Orders / Civil Penalties r i tj

• Significant meetings / actions Important correspondence received / Congressional hearings requiring testimony / feedback ori hearings Foreignincidents(majorexposuresorreleases, degradation of systems, generi problems); expand in Weekly Information Report)

Exemptions, orders, events related to a hearing, releases, operating problems, failures (as appropriate to a daily report; otherwise report in Weekly Information Report)

Staff briefings for a Commissioner's Office or a Congressional Office J. Weekly Information Report

'd 1.

Purpose:

To provide a single weekly document to include a general summary of the week's activities.

2. Scope: Since this report serves to advise a broad range of readership (Commission, staff to Branch Chief level and above, general public via PDR ano subscription), it should be a genuine summary covering ongoing as well as completed items. It should particularly include items which the Commission should be aware of but which do not deserve the more formal treatment of an information paper. Items previously covered in Daily Staff Notes should not be reported in this report unless there is significant new, important or updated information that is important to pass on. Include'only significant or unusual regional meetings and site visits.

I-13

3. Details of Reporting:

L- )

a .-

Offices / Regions submit typed reports via electronic transmission to A0/EDO by COB each Friday using format shown in Exhibit 9. A negative report is. required from all offices,

b. Individual issue reports should be limited to a paragraph or two.

c. Input should include:

Status of major issues and projects in which the office is involved and with which staff or the Commission has an ongoing interest.

Reports of meetings / task groups which may be of interest outside the office involved.

Actions undertaken or projected which may'be of interest outside the office involved.

\

Information which might normally be circulated as an Information Paper, unless it is either too difficult to reduce to one or two paragraphs or too timely to wait for issuance of the report.

FOIA/ Privacy Act actions, summarized (ADM).

Licensing Actions.

Significant foreign incidents or information.

Upcoming significant meetings (see 3.d.).

Items otherwise requested to be a part of this report.

NOV 1992

/' 1 14 l 'N

n ,

b h-

d. Procedures for Reporting Meetings I

'w) 1. Submit meeting notices as a separate page with the Weekly Information Report, using the format shown in Exhibit 10.

2. Include meetings with external groups and any really significant or unusual internal meetings.

3. Report meetings to be held during the 3-week period beginning 10 days after the reporting date (e.g., the December 10 report will include meetings scheduled for the 3-week period beginning December 20).

4. Adjust the report each week to-reflect schedule changes and additions. For significant meetings, report last minJte changes and additions in the Daily Staff Notes.

Also, offices need to ensure their meeting recordings l reflect significant changes.

K. Weekly Staff Meetings v

The E00 staff meetings are usually held every Friday afternoon and are attended by Program Office Directors (or their deputies or designees), .;'

and such others as may be invited. These meetings provide offices with the opportunity to raise and discuss important issues that might even-tually be brought to the EDO for resolution and discussion.

L Program Reviews Periodic reviews of programs of major offices were established by the E00 on November 17, 1982, with revised procedures issued October 7, 1986 and December 19, 1988. Office Directors should utilize these briefings to air NOV 1992 I-15

i programmatic and office program problems of mid- and long-term nature to-

~

obtain the decisions necessary for the prompt ind effective management of

\ their program responsibilities. Briefings are not-to consist of stat'us briefings of problem-free programs. Problem areas should be as precisely defined as possible. See Exhibit 11 for detailed implementing instructions.

4 NOV 1992

. 1-16

SAMPLE CERTIFICATION STATEMENT l

[USE SINGLE SPACING];

Approved For Publication The Commission ha s delegated to the EDO (10 CFR 1.31(c)) the authority to develop and promulgate-rules as defined in the APA-(5.U.S.C. 551(4))

subject to the limitations in_NRC Manual-Chapter 0103, Organization and:

Functions, Office of the Executive Director for Operations, paragraphs 0213,  ;

038, 039, and 0310. t

• The enclosed (proposed rule] [ final rule] entitled " Physician's Use of Radioactive Drugs," would-amend 10 CFR 35.14(b)(7) to allow licensees to use certain radiopharmaceuticals for recently developed diagnostic imaging '

procedures not listed on their respective labels.*

This [ proposed rule] [ final rule] does not constitute a significant question of policy, nor does it amend regulations contained in 10 CFR Parts 7, 8, or 9 Subpart C concerning matters of policy. _ I therefore find that this rule is within the scope-of my rulemaking authority and am proceeding to issue it.

i Date [Name]

/ Executive Director for Operations 1

...

• Between asterisks insert the necessary description for the particular_ '

rule in question. These words are taken from a particular rule to serve- '

as an example.

5 4

E 4

NOV 1992 1-17 EXHIBIT.1 4

3

SAMPLE WEEKLY INFORMATION REPORT ENTRY

[USE SINGLE SPACING)

Proposed Rule signed by EDO On , the Executive Director for Operations approved a proposed rule which revises 10 CFR 35.14(b)(7) to allow licensees to use certain radiopharmaceuticals for recently developed diagnostic imaging procedures not listed on their respective labels.

This constitutes notice to the Commission that, in accordance with the rulemaking authority delegated to EDO, the EDO has signed this proposed rule for publication in the FR.

O l-18 EXHIBIT 2 A

h.

PART VIII INTERFACE WITH THE COMMISSION AND COMMISSION STAFF 0FFICES A. Keeping the Comission Informed B. Principles for Comunication with the Comission C. Staff Representations of Commission Policy D Communication Between Staff and Commissioners' Offices E. Guidance from a Commissioner and/or a Commissioner's Staff F. Commission Coordination with Staff G. OGC Procedures Regarding OGC Concurrence in Documents Transmitted to the-

\ Commission by the EDO H. NRC Public Affairs Policy I. Memorandum of Understanding between the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) and NRC Staff - Executive Director for Operations. (EDO)

J. Memorandum of Understanding between the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) and NRC Staff - Executive Director for Operations (EDO)-

K. Improved Coordination and Communication with ACRS/ACNW L. Scheduling of Documents for ACRS and ACNW Reviews and Urgent ACRS and ACNW Reviews M. Coordination of ACRS/ACNW Full Committee Meetings

-(

-g NOV 1992 VIII-l

[- N. ACRS/ACNW Participation in the Development of NRC-Rules and Policy Statements and Responses to ACRS/ACNW Concerns

-(

0. Legislative and Regulatory Review Requirements for the Office of Inspector General P. Staff Activities during O!G Audits Q. Guidelines Concerning Significant Staff Actions Exhibits _

b("

h 1992 VIII NOV O

V

4 __ . _- _ _. . _ _ . . _ _ . -

b VIII INTERFACE WITH THE COMMISSION AND COMMISSION STAFF OFFICES A. Keeoina the Com31;sion Informed Policy it is the general policy and obligation of the staff to kean ti antire Commission informed of matters of interest to them. Informativ sovided to a Commissioner's office, other than a verbal response to a request for factual information, will be provided via the Office of the EDO with-copies to all Commissioners' offices, if, at any time, a member of the staff discovers that information provided to a Commissioner is inaccurate or incomplete, corrections or updates, as appropriate, will be provided to the Commissioners.

B. Principles for Communication with the Commission Backaround The staff has the responsibility to provide accurate and timely information to the Commission on matters which they are considering. It is important when communicating with the Commission that the-staff recognize the Commissioners may not have a detailed knowledge of the subject matter. The e is always the possibility that information may be misinterpreted or taxen in a different context. The likelihood of these problems may be even greater during meetings or briefings when- the staff is responding to ad hoc questions. Therefore, it is important that the staff be sensitive to this occurrence and take corrective action as soon as possible. The following are guidelines which should help the' staff achieve these objectives. These guidelines should be-discussed with new employees and particularly those who will be briefing the Commission-or a Commissioner for the first time.

=

NOV 1992 viii_3

, .-2,-- ,-..-'--.,

b Written Communication

1. Written communications to the Commission should be timely and accurate and avoid the use of vague or subjective language where possible.

2. If the information provided is in dispute or there are differing views on the interpretation, that should be so noted and discussed.

3. If information, once provided, is subsequently found to be in error or misinterpreted, a correction or ( irification should be provided as soon as possible.

4. Peer review and the coordination process should be used as a check on the accuracy of information.

Oral Communications

1. The guidelines for written communications also apply to oral communications.

2. If a question is not clear or could be interpreted in different ways, ask for clarification.

3. If you do not know the answer, say so and offer to provide it y subsequently if the Commission so desires, t

4. If you can provide a partial answer, do so and provide the remaining response subsequently if the. Commission so desires, i.

l

5. If you believe you know the answer, but have some doubts, provide the answer, but _ qualify it. Subsequently, follow up to ensure the response was correct.

/" N0y 1992 yiij.4 t

h, 6. If you have a high degree of confidence'that you'.tnow the correct i answer to the question, provide it to the extent appropriate; subse-quently, follow up to verify your response was correct.

7. Staff and managers who observe or participate in Commission meetings or briefings must be alert to the possibility that information -

provided is incorrect or may have been misinterpreted. If they observe such an occurrence, they should discreetly bring it to the attention of the responsible manager either during or after the meeting depending on the circumstances. Corrections or clarifications should subsequently be made as appropriate.

C. Staff Reoresentations of Commission Poliev In advance of representing a Commission policy position the Commission should have an opportunity to review the proposed representation. This policy should be generally applied but in particular it should apply to requests from Congress for a Commission policy determination when there is an unresolved issue which warrants a Commission policy determination; when a majority of the current Commission has not approved a Commission

^

\ position; and when a contemporaneous requirement for such a dett.rmination arises.

D. Communication Between Staff and Commissioners' Offices

1. Any member of the staff should respond to an inquiry from a Commissioner's office to provide factual information. Contacts from Commissioners' offices requesting factual information should be ans-wered directly and promptly. Staff members will then inform their supervision about contacts of substance. Supervision, in turn, will notify upper management, including the appropriate Deputy E00 or the A0/EDO.

2. Responses that involve significant staff effort or represent views on policy will be provided formally in accordance with established NRC procedures. See Chapter III. Any case which requires the provision b NOV 1992 vi!I-5

(

~ - - -- - . .

of documents or a written response will be transmitted via a trans--

mittal note to the Comissioner's Assistant over-the signature of the A0/EDO. Copies of the transmittal will be sent to the other Comis-sioners' Assistants, SECY, EDO, and the appropriate Deputy EDO. See Exhibit 1. If an NRC staff member is aware of information that-they believe is of special interest to a Comissioner, it should be provided in accordance with the instructions above.

3. In some circumstances, documents provided to a Commissioner may be of such a narrow scope or may be-so unique to an individual Comissioner's interests or field activities, that distribution to the other Commissioners' offices would be unwarranted. Examples include:

(1) Documents taken by Commissioners from-meetings while on field visits; (2) Excerpts of publicly available dzaments provided in response to a specific Commissioner's request (e.g., selected excerpts from a NUREG.); or (3) Commissioner's briefing packages for field visits to reactor sites.

4. Determinations not to provide documents to all Commission offices should be cleared with the A0/EDO.

5. Occasions may arise where a member of the staff discovers that information which has been provided to Commissioner offices has become inaccurate or incomplete, or was -inaccurate or incomplete, in the first place. When such a discovery is made, the Comissioners will be formally notified of the error via a transmittal note from

- the Office of the EDO. Contact the A0/EDO to get guidance on the appropriate addressees and signator. Corrections of information provided to the Commissioners will be made in as expeditious a manner as possible.

6. Refer also to NRC Field Policy Manual Number 16.

i l-NOV E VIII-6 l

--~

r-- ,, - - - - -

E. Guidance from a ' Commissioner and/or a Commissioner's staff '

There may be occasions in meeting with staff when views are expressed by.

a Commissioner and/or a Comissioner's assistant that'may appear to be or may represent guidance. The staff needs to be sensitive ~ to the fact that.

one Comissioner's views and/or guidance has to be interpreted in the context of previous guidance and/or policy set by the entire Commission.

Guidance provided by one Commissioner should be promptly discussed with the appropriate Deputy EDO and/or the A0/E00 to determine the appropriate course of action.

F. Commission Coordination with Staff On March 25, 1986, the Chairman notified the E00 of procedures for Commission coordination with staff.

Commissioners will coordinate their travel to Regional Offices and facilities with the Deputy Regional Administrator who would then notify the DEDR Regional Coordinator and other applicable offices. Refer to NRC

~

field Policy Manual Number 11.

NJ Significant requests for information (e.g., collections of documents,

-original work, meetings) would be directed by Commissioners to the EDO, with copies to the Chairman. After receipt of the request, .if questions of priority arise because staff has identified the request as requiring sigt.ificant resources to fulfill, the EDO is to discuss the request with the Commissioner who originated it. The purpose of that discussion would be to ensure that the scope of the request is fully understood.

Following that discussion, if the Comissioner still wants the request to be fulfilled and the ED0 still believes there is an is:ue regarding its priority, the Chairman is to be notified. The Chairman will then be the initial arbiter of the matter. If the Chairman's decision is not satisfactory to the Commissioner making the request, that Commissioner can bring the matter to the full Commission for a vote. ED0 will review the Commissioner requests prior.to assignment for those requiring significant resources and will follow the steps outlined above. Offices NOV 1992 VIII-7 i

w

p and Regions are to bring to ED0's attention any requests which might-create a burden and the EDO will reassess his position.

G. 0GC Procedures Reaardino OGC Concurrence in Documents Transmitted to the Commission by the E00 On August 15, 1986, the General Counsel issued the following procedures regarding OGC concurrence in documents transmitted to the Commission by the EDO.

1. An OGC signature on a concurrence ladder is an indication that the signer is authorized to sign off for 0GC and-has done so.

The same is true of a non-concurrence of statement of OGC posi-tion. Internal OGC procedures should be adequate to insure that.

the appropriate level of OGC management is aware of and respon-sible for the OGC sign-off. In other words, the originating office need not look for the personal signature of the General Counsel on every paper; OGC will determine internally whether the GC, a Deputy GC, an Assistant GC, or other designated attor-h G

ney can represent the Office position.

2. If an OGC position has been provided, that should be noted before the package goes to the Commission. In SECY papers, that will ordinarily be accomplished by inclusion of a statement to the effect that, "OGC has reviewed this paper and...." The reviewing attorney should provide this' language for inclusion in the paper. In correspondence, the OGC position will be reflected-on the concurrence copy which accompanies the original. In the-absence of such indicia of OGC review, the GC, or his designee, will determine whether OGC review is necessary and assign the paper to the appropriate component of the Office.

H. NRC Public Affairs Policy The Director of Public Affairs by memo of _ April 24, 1986, provided the EDO guidance to the staff for responding to_ inquiries from the press.

( NOV 1992 VIII-8

- This guidance, which was sent to Office Directors'and Regional Adminis-

' t, trators by the EDO on April 30, 1986, is at Exhibit 2. Additionally, the EDO issued guidance on August 17,.1990 concerning advance notice of press articles. This guidance is also at Exhibit 2.

I. Memorandum of Understandino Between the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) and NRC Staff - Executive Director for ODerations (EDO)

A Memorandum of Understanding between the ACNW and EDO was issued effec-tive October 1,_1990, to establish procedures for ACNW review and comment on nuclear waste management matters developed by the NRC staff. See Exhibit 3 for a copy of the MOU.

J. Memorandum of Understandino Between the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeouards (ACRS) and NRC Staff - Executive Director for Operations (ED0)

A Memorandum of Understanding between the ACRS and EDO was issued effec-tive May 19, 1988, to establish procedures for ACRS participation in the development of NRC rules, policy matters, and safety-related guidance at O\'

a sufficient early stage to permit constructive interaction during formulation of these matters. An updated attachment to the MOV was issued effective December 4,1991 to (1) reflect the division of review responsibilities in place between the ACRS and the ACNW and (2) bring current those areas of ACRS review interest given the present regulatory structure in place for future nuclear power plants- (i.e.,10 CFR Part 52) and for license renewal of existing nuclear power plants (i.e.,10 CFR '

Part 54). See Exhibit 4 for a copy of the MOU. In addition-to the MOU, on March 14, 1989, the EDO issued other suggestions on how to improve interactions with the ACRS.

. Technical managers should be familiar with the ACRS members, staff and subcommittees who have interest in their programs.

Periodic informal discussions should occur to ascertain level of interest in projects and communicate status.

{J NOV 1992 Vill-9 I

1

. 1

. - -. -. . . ~ _ ,

. The informal discussions referenced above' do not represent

( formal ACRS coordination or comment. When it is clear that formal ACRS coordination is required, the topic should be sched-uled for subcommittee and committee meetings.

• Ihe Commission expects the staff to have ACRS comments available when a recommendation is made to the Commission. Typically, topics should be scheduled with the ACRS two months before a recommendation is due to the Commission. When scheduler diffi- ,

culties arise, discuss them wit? the ACRS and OEDO. Frequently the ACRS will accept draft positivis in order to accommodate tight schedules, but make sure subsr uent drafts or final ver-sions are provided on a timely bas . .

K. Imoroved Coordination and Communication with ACRS/ACNW On December 9, 1991, the EDO issued the following procedures to. improve the process of coordination and communication with the ACRS/ACNW.

, 1. It is the primary responsibility of the staff working with the ACRS/

ACNW to determine whether ACRS or ACNW coordination should be sought on staff documents before they are submitted to the Commission. How-ever, in order to assist the staff and the committees, the Office of the Secretary, when developing draft SRMs which direct the staff to prepare regulatory documents, will seek to determine whether the Com-mission considers ACRS/ACNW review to be appropriate and, if so, will include guidance language in the SRM. If a preference for review is expressed, additional time will be factored into the suspense date.

2. The staff should be more conscientious in identifying topics that are appropriate for ACRS/ACNW review consistent with the-ACRS charter, specifically Sections 29 and 182b of the Atomic Energy Act, Parts 2, 50, 52 and 54 of 10 CFR, and the Memorandum of Understanding between the ACRS and NRC staff. Staff-initiated Commission papers should be a'special area of focus. The staff also need to differentiate between requesting ACRS/ACNW review and comment (written response gy gg VIII-10

%/

9

' ~

requested by ACRS/ACNW) and an information or status briefing (no X formal ACRS/ACNW response is requested and ACRS/ACNW concurrence should not be assumed). On this latter point, it should be assumed

~

as a general practice that there will not be any review and comment actions by the ACRS/ACNW absent the proposed review document (s) being-provided to the Committee in a timely manner.

3. To provide the ACRS/ACNW staff more insight about papers being developed by the NRC staff for which no ACRS/ACNW review or informa-tion briefing is to be requested, A0/ED0 will_ provide the Committees with 90 day projections of such papers (both EDO controlled and office-initiated). This will allow the ACRS/ACNW to express a pros-pective interest in particular topics we initially had not planned to bring before them. For these particular topics, the staff should be prepared to interact with the Committee staffs to provide added in-sight and/cr summary information to enable the Committeas to deter-mine their review interests.

L. Schedulina of Documents for ACRS and ACNW Reviews and Uraent ACRS and ACNW Review 3 NRC staff documents related to an upcoming agenda item are to be sent to the ACRS and ACNW about 30 days in advance of the next full Committee review meeting (prior to the ACRS and ACNW agenda planning session in the preceding month). Normally, documents not received within this timeframe will likely be deferred beyond the upc9 ming full Committee agenda. The ACRS and ACNW recognize that there my be priority Commission or EDO items that are on a " fast track" where the normal 30-day document receipt cannot be met for one cause or another, and within reason, will asempt -

to accommodate these fast track items. However, Office Directors are to take the necessary planning steps to make these fast. track items very rare and to ensure firmness of their ACRS and ACNW agenda planning items

. offered to the ACRS and ACNW by the monthly A/0 agenda. Where such fast track actions are unavoidable, the responsible Office Director will ,

provide for signature of the appropriate Deputy Executive Director a memorandum for the ACRS and ACNW Chairman that (1) requests an urgent u

1 1

i u _ _ _ . _. _ _ . _ _ _ .___ _ _ ___.-- __. . .

.b full Committee review,-(2) describen the basis-for the urgency, and (3) announces.the transmittal of the related review documents which will be transmitted by the office to the ACRS and ACNW staff in the most expedi-tious manner practicable.

M. Coordination of ACRS/ACNW Full Committee Meetinos The following procedures have been established to provide for centraliza-tion of the process of forwarding issues to ACRS/ACNW for consideration at Full Committee Meetings.

On the first business day after the 31h of each month, Offices should provide to A0/EDO a projection of items to be presented to the Full Com-mittee for the next 3 monthly meetings (e.g., on July 5 for meetings in August, September and October). No report is required if no topics are to be submitted. Provide information for each month in format shown in Exhibit 5. Documents sent to ACRS/ACNW should include a forwarding _ memo indicating what meetings they pertain to and what is expected from the ACRS/ACNW. General guidance for what issues are relevant for ACRS/ACNW O' consideration and for generally keeping ACRS/ACNW informed is contained in the ACRS and ACNW/EDO Memorandums.of Understanding.

ACRS/ACNW has indicated that they will provide ED0 a list of items _ they propose for consideration by the 1st'of each month. When that is re-ceived, it will be provided to those concerr.ed.

N. ACRS/ACNW Participation in the Develooment of NRC Rules and Policy Statements and Responses to ACRS/ACNW Concerns By memorandum of April 19, 1988, the ?,acretary advised the EDO and the ACRS of the Commission's views concerning the need for NRC staff to (1) ensure that ACRS views are solicited in the development of NRC rules and policy statements and (2) to ensure that ACRS views are reflected in final SECY papers prior to the papers being forwarded to the Commission.

The staff was notified by EDO memo of April 28,~1988. This practice is VIII-12 a NOV 1992

I to be fol' lowed on all rules and policy statements pertaining to nuclear safety matters. Yhe E00/ACRS MOU of May 19, 1988 sets forth practices to  ;

be followed by the staff in these matters. These same procedures, which are outlined in the ED0/ACffW M00 of October 1,1990, are to be followed by the stafi in dealing with the ACNW. The M00's contain specific provisions for assuring that the ACRS/ACflW is aware of topics under .

development by the staff and for obtaining ACRS/ACliW views on subjects of interest. The Commission prefers to have the ACRS'/AttiW' views on major topics at the same time it receives the staff views and recommendations, if managed properly, ACRS/AtllW review should not result 19 any additional delays in presenting papers to the Commission for its consideration.

When conflicts in submission schedules develop that are contrary to obtaining prior ACRS/ACfiW views, the ED0 shall be promptly notified. The review process should be managed so that such conflicts become exceeding-ly rare.

Additionally, by memorandum of August 9, 1989, the Secretary advised the EDO that as a matter of routine, the staff is requested to formally respond to all concerns which the ACRS/ACf1W brings to the Commissioners' O attention. The Commission should be provided copies of the formal re-sponse to the ACRS/ACffW and should be allowed adequate time to take note of the response prior to staff's implementation of final action. To ensure that this procedure is followed, the ACB/EDO will control each ACRS/ActiW 1etter to the appropriate office for a response to be prepared for the ED0's signature with copies of the response to be sent to each Commissionsr and SECY. Routinely, the Commission will be provided 10 days from the date of the response ~ o ACRS/ACNW to make any comments they may have.

O. Leaislative and Reaulatory Review Reauirements for the Office of Inspec-tor General On January 24, 1990, the O!G notified EDO, OGC, and SECY o: their role in reviewing legislative and regulatory proposals to assess their impact on economy and efficiency. See Exhibit 6. Offices are to ensure that indi-cated documents they are responsible for handling or issuing are sent to NOV 1992 v!!!-13

---,ev ~ -<m a wv-. ,- ww,- -

[ the OlG, allowing for a reasonable comment period.

As a general rule OlG should be on distribution for all indicated docu- 2 ments which are forwarded to the Commission for information or approval. ,

, The following are examples of the types of documents the O!G would receive:  !

1. Draft documents havina sianificant iroact on NRC oolicy or orocram structure (at interoffice coordination staae)

For example: #

+ Papers sent to other offices for coordination or comment.

• Policy or program papers sent to the ACRS.

• Five Year Plan.

• Proposed and final rules.

2. Draft Manual Chaoters Management Directive 1.1 contains procedures for OlG review of new or revised management directive.

3. Draft interoffice Memorandum of Understandina

4. Draft NRC comments on reaulations cronosed by other Federal aaencies Make sure divisions which have ongoing interaction with other agen-cies are sensitive to ulis. For example:

• EPA

= DOL

• D0T

+ 000

+ DOE

• FEMA

• Defense Nuclear Facility Safety Board.

NOV 1932 vill-14

- y- -e -- - r- as =

i 4

5. Draft Executive Orders received for comment x

6. Draft Interaaency_ Memoranda of UnderstandinQ )

i l

Same guidance as item 4. l These examples are not all inclusive, and judgment will be needed by offices. As a general rule, the O!G should be provided a document at the draft stage if comments are being requested from other offices and before forwarding to the EDO. Offices should document that they have provided a l copy to the O!G by noting on the concurrence page that a copy has been l sent and the date it was sent. It will be incumbent upon OlG to notify _

offices if they plan to provide comments. Every effort will be made by the OlG to provide comments within the same time provided to other offices.

P. Staff Activities durina OIG Audits On January 27, 1992, the EDO issued guidelines for staff activities during 01G audits as follows.

When the Office of the Inspector General (010) announces plans to audit a given NRC program it is important for O!G planning and efficient use of resources for the staff to communicate to the IG any planned or ongoing activities which could affect the audit. The following general guide-lines should be followed.

- Soon after the IG announces an intention to audit a given program, the IG will arrange for an entrance meeting to discuss the nature and focus of the audit. The staff at this time should raise any planned or ongoing program or procedural changes or activities which could affect the structure or focus of the audit.

- If at anytime after the entrance meeting and-before the audit is complete the staff intends to change the program, procedures or activities, the OIG should be promptly informed.

NOV 19J2 Vill-15

..- - , - - - , . - . . , . . . _ . . - - , . - ----- , - - - - - - - . -. . - . . - _ , ,_r - , .- l,.._.1-- -

'm Once an audit is announced, the staff is not precluded from making

( ) improvements or correcting weaknesses in that program, but the OlG should be informed of these activities at the earliest opportunity and prior +.o commencing any planned effort.

Q. Guidelines Concernina Sianificant Staff Actions This section establishes the general process for r' staff offices to use in the handling of significant staff actions. The following codifies guidance previously presented in memo form. The handling of these actions is important because their proper handling can enhance the Agency's effective relations with Congress, other Federal agencies, State and local governments, the press, and the public.

Guidance In identifying staff actions which would fall under this guidance, the staff office should take into consideration two points: 1) the signifi-cance of the staff action and 2) the sensitivity of Congress and/or the

i. public toward the action or plant. For example, this guidance should be considered when a highly significant staff action is to be taken with regard to any plant (e.g. the dispatch of an IIT, issuance of an operat-ing license, authorization of restart after a torced outage). This guidance should also be considered when a less significant staff action is to be taken with regard to a highly sensitive plant (those on the

" watch list" or a highly contested plyd Actions must be considered on a case-by-case-basis. The examples listed are only meant to sensitize staff members to the kinds of actions that are considered significant and are not meant to be an all inclusive list of significant staff actions. Also note that enforcement actions are covered in a separate Enforcement Policy.

When an action is potentially significant, the staff should contact the Office of the Executive Director for Operations (0E00), Congressional Affairs (CA), Public Affairs (PA), and State Programs (SP) well in f') NOV 1992 v111-16 V

advance of the action (or as much as possible) to coordinate any neces-s sary notifications. In each case, the staff will also discuss with the OEDO, CA, PA, and SP, as appropriate, the order in which the parties involved will be notified of the staff action and the timing of those notifications. Notifications of significant actions are timed to allow those notified to take appropriate internal actions and to prepare-to respond to inquiries.

The staff office should also notify the Public Document Room. Under normal circumstances, the staff office should routinely send the PDR the capropriate documents. However, if public interest is such that the appropriate documents are needed at the PDR more quickly than normal, more rapid distribution may be appropriate.

O j

i

-\

NOV 1992 Vlli-17 s

9 s e y < -4 w ..,w,w- , , , - , , , . . ,4 w g. ,w,,., , - - ,,,7-..m m._ ,, --- em.,,,, -e ,,ww-,--,n,s . - - -.,.,..s--,, _ - _ .

[ SAMPLE TRANSMITTAL NOTE TO COMMISSIONER'S ASSISTANT TO: (name),OCM/[ initials)  !

FROM: [name). A0/EDO

SUBJECT:

INFORMATION REQUEST Attached is information your office requested on the Running Book inventory concept.

[name),A0/0E00 Att W ent:

As stated CC W/o ' 14:1b

[name?, W j M U..- ;;

name; , .<l'

! g o l ' 4 , e y name , 0L4 ta N ,

(name,l, OCM/'l in1*. i al s' SECY EDO DEDR or OEDS (as appropriate) k >

N0y 1932 vill-19 EXHIBIT 1 e , u e --

- - . . . .- - . . . . - . - _ - - - . - . . - - . . . - . - . _ . ~ . . . - . -

EDEl ,

l April 30, 1986 l MEMORANDUM FOR: Office Directors and Regional Administrators _

FROM: Victor Stello, Jr.

SUBJECT:

NRC PUBLIC AFFAIRS POLICY {

Attached is a memo Joe Fouchard has written per my request. The memo provides i guidance to staff for responding to inquiries from the press. .j I expect the staff to be fully cooperative in responding to media representa-tives, but we should follow the guidance of this memo. ,

Please bring this to the attention of all of your staff.

[ Original signed by)

Victor Stello, Jr.

Executive Director for Operations ,

g,

Attachment:

As stated  ;

r i

NOV 1932 VIII-20 EXHIBIT 2 4

l l .. . . . _ ~ . . _ _ . _ _ . _ . . _ . . , _ , . _ _ , , , . . . _ ,, , , , _ , _ , . _

EDU April 24, 1986 HEMORANDUM FOR: Victor Stello, Jr.

Executive Director for Operations FROM: Joseph J. Fouchard, Director Office of Public Affairs

SUBJECT:

NRC PUBLIC AFFAIRS POLICY You have requested my views on how staff should handle inquiries from members of the news media.

The NRC Manual Chapter 3103 defines the objectives and responsibilities of the public affairs program and the responsibilities of the Office or Division directors. As you know, it has been the policy of this agency to be open with the public and press. We try to be as helpful as possible. While NRC employees are not normally required to talk with the press, and some prefer not to, we do not discourage them from doing so. In fact, on many occasions we ask the staff to provide information.

Employees should not be reluctant to refer calls to the Office of Public Affairs on matters involving non-routine information or inquiries which the manual chapter."

<D s

Here are the basic factors in handling requests from the news media for information:

(1) NRC encourages prompt and accurate response to inquiries from the press by the knowledgeable staff. If the staffer doesn't know the answer or if the staffer does not believe that the requested information is within his or her sphere of expertise, he or she should say so and refer the call to the Office of Public Affairs (OPA).

(2) Staff members responding to press inquiries should provide any informa-tion which normally would be publicly available. If the information requested goes beyond that which the staff member is familiar with, the inquiry should be referred to more knowledgeable NRC staff or to OPA.

(3) If the. staff members prefers not to talk with the news media, the call should be referred to OPA to arrange a suitable alternative.

(4) The staffer's supervisor and OPA should be informed of news media calls to assure that media interest in a particular subject is brought to the attention of others within the NRC working on matters related to the subject who may have significant additional information.

b NOV 1992 Vill-21 EXHIBIT 2

-. t Victor Stello t I would caution that in providing guidance to the staff it should be made clear that such guidance is an attempt to provide a uniform practice and not '

- to cut off the flow of information.

[ Original signed by)

Joseph J. Fouchard, Director Office of Public Affairs O

t NOV 1992 v111-22 EXHIBIT 2 g

t

% GE1

\ August 17, 1990 MEMORANDUM FOR: Office Directors Regional Administrators i FROM: James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations ,

SUBJECT:

ADVANCE NOTICE OF PRESS ARTICLES We should try to ensure that the Commission is not surprised by information in news articles, including those by the trade press, on significant issues of interest to them. When the staff learns that a news organization is planning or considering an article about a significant issue, particularly when the issue is new to the Commission, then steps need to be taken to keep the Commission informed through the Office of the Executive Director for Opera-tions and Office of Public Affairs as appropriate.

01 ease discuss this with your staff and ensure they are sensitive to this need. When the staff is contacted by a reporter on matters which may be sen-sitive or issues that have not been brought before the Commission or the Executive Director for Operations, they should discuss it with their manage-ment. The Office of Public Affairs and the Office of the Executive Director for Operations should be notified and consideration given to the need to inform the Commission.

O [ original signed by)

James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations NOV 1992 vill-23 EXHIBIT 2

O MMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDIM PARTIES: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW)

ACNW Chairman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff - Executive Director for Operations (EDO)

SUBJECT:

ACNW REVIEW AND COMMENT ON NUCLEAR WASTE MANAGEMENT MATTERS DEVELOPED BY THE NRC STAFF PURPOSE:

In accordance with the Charter of the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste "the Committee will report to and advise the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on nuclear waste management as directed by the Commission on the basis of peri-odic reviews of ACHW proposals. This includes 10 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 72 (as applied to other than the site of production and utilization facilities) and -

other applicable regulations and legislative mandates such as the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act, and the Uranium Hill Tailings Radiation Control Act, as amended."

The Committee is charged with examining and reporting on "those areas of concern referred to it by the Commission or its designated representatives,

( and will undertake other studies and activities on its own initiative related to those issues directed by the Commission." Recognizing these responsibili-ties, the NRC staff will take those steps necessary to ensure that the ACNW receives material in a timely fashion for its review.

The purpose of this memorandum is to:

• Specify those nuclear waste-related matters, in addition to those related to licensing of waste management facilities, that are within ,

the purview of the ACNW.

• Establish means to keep the ACNW informed of staff actions on matters that are within its purview at the early stages of develop-ment of these matters.

. Establish procedures for ACNW review of nuclear waste-related matters at a sufficiently early stage to permit constructive inter-action.

• Enable the ACNW and the staff to establish schedules for ACNW review and comment on nuclear waste-related matters that take into account the needs of the ACNW, the NRC staff, and the Commission.

The following have been agreed upon to facilitate the ACNW review of nuclear waste-related matters that are within its purview.

vill-24 EXHIBIT 3

,- NOV 1932

- - -- ,,,n--- ----- . . -v,

_. . _ . _ _ _ . . _ . - _ . m _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _

HEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTAf1 DING 2 AREAS OF ACNW INTEREST The scope of ACNW interest encompasses matters relating to the following parts of NRC's regulations (found in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations):

• Part 40 - Appendix A - Criteria Relating to the Operation of Uranium Mills and the Disposition of Tailings or Wastes Produced by the

Extraction or Concentration of Source Material from Ores Processed Primarily For Their Source Material Content

+ Part 50 - Domestic licensing of production and utilization facili-ties, as it applies to decommissioning plans

. Part 60 - Disposal of high-level radioactive wastes in geologic repositories

. Part 61 - Licensing requirements for land disposal of radioactive waste

• Part 70 - Domestic licensing of special nuclear material, as it applies to decommissioning after possession only license

. Part 71 - Packaging and transportation of radioactive material ,

. Part 72 - Licensing requirements for the independent storage of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste, as applied to off-site storage.

(NOTE: Although the ACRS has primary responsibility regarding 10 CFR Part 20, ACNW maintains a continuing interest with respect to items that impact on radioactive waste handling and disposal facilities. The ACRS/ACNW office will keep ACNW informed of anticipated NRC activities based on material provided for ACRS consideration so as to provide an opportunity for input on waste-related issues. Meetings with NRC staff, licensees, etc. will be handled with participation and support by the NRC-staff on a case-by-case basis as needed.)

i

MEMORANDUM Of UNDERSTANDING 3 Specific matters of ACHW interest include matters that impact on safety in the following areas:

• Rules, Policy Matters, Regulatory Guidance - Proposed, revised, or withdrawn

- Rules and Appendices

- Policy Statements that are intended for publication in the federal Reoister Regulatory Guides

- Standard Review Plans Branch Technical Positions

- Technical Guidance to States and Compacts regarding Low-Level Radioactive Waste Issues

• Licensing activities for facilities within the purview of the ACNW, including issuance of CP, OL, Amendments and Terminations.

• Selected prelicensing activities for HLW and LLW facilities, e.g.,

Site Characterization Plan, Site Characterization Analysis, Study plans / procedures, as deemed appropriate in consultation with the NRC staff.

ACNW/NRC STAFF CONTACTS An NRC staff contact will be established in the Office of Nuclear Material i Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) to coordinate the provisions of this memorandum.

A designated ACNW staff member will serve as the ACNW contact.

EARLY INTERACTION The EDO will take necessary steps to ensure that matters requiring ACNW review are identified in the early stages of development and that sufficient time is allowed to permit orderly review by the ACNW. Accordingly, when a safety-related matter, in an area of ACNW interest, is under consideration by the NRC-staff, the cognizant NRC staff office, through the NRC staff contact, will inform the ACNW of the anticipated staff action (e.g., proposed rulemaking, issuance of a regulatory guide) when the basic .equirements are being formu-lated. This may be achieved by adding the title, with an appropriate scope statement to the six-month-list of proposed ACNW agenda items, The ACNW will inform the cognizant NRC staff office and/or the E00's office, normally within about 30 days, whether it intends to review a specific matter.

NOV 1992 EXHIBIT 3 V111-26

. n. .e -- ._- . ._.. ~.-- - . - - - - . . _ _ ..~ .-

a HEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 4 k

ESTABLISHING A SCHEDULE FOR THE ACNW REVIEW If the ACNW decides to review a specific matter, the review normally will be performed at the following two stages:

• Prior to submittal to appropriate NRC management for action to publish a proposed position for public comment, consideration at a hearing, or other formal regulatory action, as appropriate, ,

Subsequent to the public comment period, and/or after completion of a related hearing, and prior to submittal to appropriate NRC man-agement for action to publish the final version for implementation.

There may be circumstances in which the ACNW will prefer to defer its review of a specific matter until after public comments have been received and addressed by the staff. In such cases, the cognizant NRC staff office will be notified of this preference.

The cognizant NRC staff office will ensure that schedules for the development of a specific matter include sufficient time (normally about 60 days) for ACNW review prior to the date by which ACNW comments are desired.

When, for whatever reason, a choice must be made between timely submission to the Commission or submission first for ACNW review, the Secretary of the Commission is to be consulted by the EDO.

RESOLVING ACNW COMMENTS ACNW comments will be forwarded to the Commission or to the EDO, as appropri-ate, with copies to the cognizant staff office (NRC staff contact). The NRC staff contact will ensure that copies are provided to other NRC staff offices, as appropriate.

On all matters except those where Commission priorities or safety concerns demand timely action to the contrary, the EDO will respond to ACNW comments on a specific matter prior to taking final action on that matter, or submitting it for Commission approval. In addition, Commission papers, if any, will address ACNW comments, including those not endorsed by the staff. The EDO may elect to consider ACNW comments on proposed or draft documents (e.g., proposed rules, draft regulatory guides) following~the close of the public comment period within the context of resolution of public comments.

'... 1932 Vill-27 EXHIBIT 3 7,,p , v - -, -- - c - . , - ~

l

,k HEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 5

(

SUBMITTING DOCUMENTS FOR ACNW REVIEW /INFORMATION ,

Twelve co)ies of documents related to a specific matter will be provided to i the ACNW ay the NRC staff contact / project engineer at the stages identified ,

above with a memorandum addressed to the ACHW Executive Director requesting appropriate ACNW action. When sending a specific matter to the ACNW for review, the cognizant staff office (NRC staff contact) will ensure that the ACNW is provided with copies of other related documents, public comments and  ;

the staff's resolution of these comments, and CRGR comments, as appropriate.

The cognizant staff will also include any directly related differing profes-sional opinions and/or differing professional views.- ,

- Five copies of documents related to a specific matter will also be provided to the ACNW for information by the NRC staff contact / project engineer at the fol-lowing stages, with a memorandum addressed to the ACNW Executive Director, indicating that they are sent for ACNW information:

• When it is sent to the Federal Reaister to be published for public i comment.

• When it is sent to the Federal Reaister to be published as an effective document.

DEALING WITH PREDECISIONAL DOCUMENTS In those instances in which a safety-related matter is considered predeci-sional and is not otherwise a matter which is exempt from the open meeting requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, appropriate NRC staff will participate in open ACNW Working Group or full Committee meetings considered necessary to such reviews. In those cases where discussion of controlled internal documents, including predecisional documents, is required during an open meeting, approval of the cognizant office director or regional adminis-trator shall be obtained, consistent with applicable procedures (e.g., . .

Bulletin No. 3203-25, dated February 9,~1988, Section C, Paragraph 2.b), by the office transmitting the document to the ACNW, To provide for protection in accordance with the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, documents transmitted to the ACNW that are considered to be predecisional will be identified as such either by appropriate marking or in an accompanying transmittal letter.

d e ...w, , . ,, ,,-n.l---u-g . A e - ,-& m =. - y - , , , , ,

ME MORANDUM 0F UNDERSTANDING 6 0 DEVIATIONS When deviations from procedures of this Memorandum of Understanding are unavoidable, they may be altered consistent with the needs of the ACNW/EDO.

Such changes should be mutually agreed upon by the EDO and the ACNW Executive Director.

October 1. 1990 foriainal sianed byl (Date) James M. Taylor Executive Director for

-Operations September 18. 1990 foriainal sianed byl (Date) Dade W. Moeller, Chairman Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste 4

NOV 1992 Vill-29 EXHIBIT 3

. . . _ . - ........_ .~ . _ _ _

Issued: May 19, 1988 CDEY h MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING k PARTIES: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) - ACRS Chairman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff - Executive Director for Operations

SUBJECT:

ACRSPARTICIPATIONINTHED{VELOPMENTOFNRCRULES,POLICYMATTERS, AND SAFETY-RELATED GUIDANCE The purpose of this memorandum is to establish procedures for ACRS parti:: ipa-tion in the development of NRC rules, policy matters, and safety-related guidance at a sufficiently early stage to permit constructive interaction during formulation cf these matters.

The following have been agreed upon to facilitate ACRS participation in matters of the type noted above when they are within the purview of the ACRS:

1. GENERAL

a. Areas of ACRS interest (see attachment) will be ider.tified on behalf of the ACRS by the ACRS Executive Director.

b. The NRC Staff will be responsible for ensuring that ACRS comments regar ters,pingnuclearsafetyrules,majornuclearsafetypolicymat-and safety-related guidance under development by the NRC Staff are obtained and taken into account at appropriate stages in the development process of these items. This function will normally p- be the responsibility of the cognizant NRC Staff office. An NRC contact to coordinate these activities will be assigned in every major staff program office.

. The ACRS staff engineer supporting the ACRS Regulatory Activities Subcommittee will serve as the ACRS contact for the subject matters.

The NRC contact in the responsible staff office will be the coordi-nator in the NRC Staff.

d. ACRS comments will be forwarded to the EDO or to the Commission, as appropriate, with copies to the cognizant staff office (NRC con-tact). The NRC contact will ensure that copies are provided to appropriate NRC Staff offices and the EL4 will assure consideration of ACRS comments by the NRC Staff. Commission papers, if any, will address ACRS comments, including those not endorsed by the staff.

' Safety-related guidance includes Regulatory Guides, Standard Review Plans, Branch Technical Positions, Generic Issues, and Unresolved Safety Issues.

'A major policy matter is a safety-related issue that must be brought to the attention of the Commissioners and/or requires their action before being implemented.

NOV 1992 Vill-30 EXHIBIT 4 v v . - , y n - , , - . ,- , y

. Issued: May 19, 1983

e. In those instances in which a rule, major policy matter, or safety- -

related guidance is considered predecisional and is not otherwise a matter which is exempt from the open meeting requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, appropriate NRC Staff will partici-pate in open ACRS subcommittee or full committee meetings considered necessary to such reviews.

In those cases where discussion of controlled internal documents, including predecisional documents, is required during an open meet-ing. approval of the cognizant Office Director or Regional Adminis-trator shall be obtained, consistent with applicable procedures (e.g., Bulletin No. 3203-25, dated February 9, 1988 Section C, Paragraph 2.b.) by the office transmitting the document to ACRS for its consideration.

Documents transmitted to the ACRS which are considered to be predecisional will be identified as such either by appropriate marking or in an accompanying transmittal letter so that they may be protected in accordance with the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act.

f. When m .iations from procedures of this Memorandum of Understanding are unavoidable, they may be altered consistent with the needs of the ACRS/EDO Staff or, as appropriate, in those cases where the ACRS is participating directly in a related rulemaking hearing as out-lined in 10 CFR 2.809. Such changes should be mutually agreed on by the EDO and the ACRS Executive Director.

2. PROCEDURES FOR DEALING illTH NRC RULES AND POLICY MATTERS

a. When a proposeo rule, or a major policy matter, in an area of ACRS interest is under consideration by the NRC Staff for eventual trans-mission to the Commission, the ACRS should be informed of the anti-cipated NRC Staff action when the basic requirements are being for-mulatedand an opportunity for ACRS discussion shon1d be provided.

This may be achieved by the NRC contact / project engineer providing ACRS with copies of the pertinent task initiation form (after user office endorsement) or other relevant office documents. Any written reactionby the ACRS on the need for, scope, and direction of the proposed task will be considered and responded to by the EDO.

b. Normally, ACRS comments on a rule or major policy matter will be provided at the following two stages:

• Prior to submittal to the Commission for action regarding publication of a proposed rule or major policy matter for public comment, a hearing, or other action, as appropriate.

This would normally occur before CRGR review.

• Prior to submittal to the Commission for action regarding implementation of the final rule or major policy matter unless

, Vill-31 EXHIBIT 4 L NOV 1992 l

. Issued: May 19, 1988 l

no substantive revisions are made by the staff in preparing the matter for final Commission action. This would normally occur ,

after the public comment period and/or after completion of a related hearing and before CRGR review.  ;

The cognizant NRC Staff office (NRC contact / project engineer) will ensure that schedules for the development of a specific rule or a major policy matter include sufficient time (normally about two months) for ACRS review prior to submittal to CRGR/EDO, at both stages.

c. In addition, ACRS will have the option of reviewing a specific document during the period allowed for public comment and at such other times as considered appropriate by the cognizant ACRS subcom-mittee. Under such circumstances, the NRC Staff (NRC con-tact / project engineer) will be informed as early as possible of anticipated ACRS full committee and subcommittee activities and will establish a schedule which allows the time, to the degree practica-ble, required for the ACRS input. <

d. Twenty copies of a rule or major policy matter will be provided to the ACRS for review by the NRC contact / project engineer at the stages identified in 2.b., above with a memorandum addressed to the ACRS Executive Director requesting ACRS review and also including a proposed schedule for review and publication, as appropriate. The ACRS Executive Director will keep the EDO informed of the schedule for ACRS comments / recommendations.

O When sending a rule or major policy matter to the ACRS for review, the Staff office involved (NRC contact / project engineer) will ensure that the ACRS is provided with a copy of other related documents such as differing judgments on technical issues among the NRC Staff, public comments, NRC Staff's resolution of public comments (if any),

and related CRGR meeting minutes (if any), etc.

e. Five copies of a rule or major policy matter will also be provided to the ACRS for information by the NRC contact / project engineer at the following stages, with a memorandum addressed to the Executive Director, ACRS, indicating that they are sent to ACRS for informa-tion:

. When a proposed rule or major policy matter is sent to other NRC offices by the originating = office for final review and comment.

• After incorporation of CRGR comments on a proposed rule or a policy matter, when it is sent to the Commission for approval to be published as a federal Register Notice for public com-ment.

NOV 1992 Vllb32 EGIBIT 4 y -

n - ,w- m ~r , v , n ., w~u m w

i Issued: May 19, 1988

• After approval by the Commission, when a proposed rule or a-policy matter is sent to be published as a Federal Register t Notice fo: public comment.

• CRGR review of a proposed final rule or a policy matter subse-quent to the public comment period, when it is sent to the  ;

Commission for approval for implementation.

• Final document, when it is sent to be published as an effective '

document.

3. PROCEDURES FOR DEALING WITH SAFETY-RELATED GUIDANCE (E.G.. REGULATORY EUIDES. STANDARD REVIEW PLANS. BRANCH TECHNICAL POSITIONS. GEt E L ISSUES. AND UNRESOLVED ISSUES)

a. When the NRC Staff is considering the development of new guidance or modifications (e.g., revision, cancellation, and/or substitution) of existing guidance in areas of ACRS interest, the ACRS should be informed promptly of the anticipated staff action and be afforded an opportunity to comment u ly in the process. This may be achieved by the NRC contact / project engineer providing ACRS with copies of such documents as the pertinent task initiation form (after user office endorsement) or other relevant office documents. Any written reaction by the ACRS on the need for, scope, and direction of the proposed task should be considered and responded to by the EDO.

b. Normally, ACRS comments on safety-related guidance will be provided at the following stages:

• After CRGR review, if any, and prior to issuance for public comment.

• Subsequently to the public comment period and after CRGR review, if any, and prior to issuing the final version for industry and/orNRC Staff use.

When developing schedules for safety-related guidance, the cognizant NRC staff office (NRC contact / project engineer) will ensure that such schedules include sufficient time (normally about two months) for the ACRS review,

c. In addition, ACRS will have the option of reviewing a specific document associated with safety-related guidance during the public comment period, if any, and at such other times as may be considered appropriate by the cognizant ACRS subcommittee._ Under such circum-

• stances, the NRC Staff (NRC contact / project engineer) will be informed of anticipated ACRS full committee and subcommittee activi-ties as early as possible to enable them to provide the_necessary ti_me, to the degree practicable, required for the ACRS input.

d. Twenty copies of pertinent documents dealing with safety-related guidence will be provided by the NRC contact / project engineer to the ACRS for review at the stages identified in 3.b., above, with g g Vill-33 EXHIBIT 4

.- -c w.

i

. Issued: May 19, 1988 i a memorandum addressed to the ACRS Executive Director requesting

. ACRS review and also including a proposed schedule for review and publication, as appropriate. The ACRS Executive Director will keep i the EDO informed of the schedule for ACRS comments / recommendations.

When sending proposed safety-related guidance to the ACRS for revivw, the staff office involved (NRC contact / project engineer) will ensure that the ACRS is provided with a copy of other related documents, as appropriate, such as differing judgments on technical issues among theNRC Staff, public comments NRC Staff's resolution of public comments, related CRGR meeting minutes, etc.

e. Five copies of pertinent safety-related guidance documents will also be provided to the ACRS for information by the NRC contact / project engineer at the following states with a mems?andum addressed to the Executive Director, ACRS, indicating that they are sent to ACRS for information:

• When a proposed safety-related guidance is sent to other NRC offices by the originating offices for final review and com-ment.

• When it is sent to be published as a Federal Register Notice for public comment.

• When it is sent to be published as a final document for indus-try and/or NRC Staff use.

[0riginal signed by)

May 19. 1988 (Date) Victor Stello, Jr.

Executive Director for 0perations

[ Original signed by]

May 19. 1988

-(Date) William Kerr, Chairman Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards

Attachment:

Areas of ACRS Interest 4

NOV EG2 v111-34 EXHIBIT 4

- . . . . - - . . . . - - . - - .- - - .. . -n -

, REVISED .

October 7, 1991 December 4. 1991

, Attachment to MOU Areas of ACPS Interest Per item 1.a. of Memorandum of Understandina ACRS Participation in the Develooment of NRC Rules. i Policy Matters. and Safety-Related Guidance '

For purposes of implementing the MOV noted above, the ACRS has identified the following areas of interest which consist of safety-related rules, proposed rule changes, or appendices in the areas noted below. Policy matters and  ;

regulatory guidance which impact on safety considerations in these areas are also of interest.

• Part 20 - Standards for Protection Against Radiation

+ Part 21 - Reporting of Defects and Noncompliance Part 50 - Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization facilities

• Part 52 - Early Site Permits; Standard Design Certifications; and Combined Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants

• Part 53 -

Criteria and Procedures for Determining the Adequacy of Available Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage Capacity

+ Part 54 -

Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal

• Part 55 - Operators' Licenses

+ Part 70 - Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material

• Part 72 - Licensing Requirements for the Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear Fitel and High-level Radioactive Waste

• Part 73 - Physical Protection of Plants and Materials Part 100 -

Reactor Site Criteria With respect to new Parts to 10 CFR that impact on safety-related matters, the ACRS should be provided an opportunity for review and comment.

Regarding proposed changes, or appendixes to Part 2 " Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings, or Part_51, " Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory functions," which impact on safety-related aspects of the regulatory process (e.g., limits on the scope or nature NOV 1992 vill-35 EXHIBIT 4 l _ __ _ _

of the safety review process), the ACRS also has an interest to a d2 gree that copies should be provided for information.

I i [0riginal signed by)

U ACRS Executive Director 11/27/91 (Date)

[ Original signed by)

NRC, Executive Director for Operations 12/9/92 (Date)

O== ""'" '* - '

f \' \

a Title / Issue / Contact Purcose a

^PRIL Priority Related Documents a

E

1. (This should include (Only 3 type entries: .(Hioh if it is important (What document (s) not in topics which we know " Request ACRS/ACfN to deal with it possession of ACRS/ACfN

.ACRS/ACNW has an interest coment Status Report," this month;* Medium: now will be available and g as well as those we wish Discus matters of general ACRS/ACfW must eventually when will they be for-g to put forward on our own intt 'st.) deal with it; low: warded) (If an item volition). If staff doesn't need requires a closed ses-but offering the sugges- sion, that should be tion of a meeting.) noted.)

• ACRS/ACtN can handle 3-S i

"High Priority" items a month.

Samoles Meeting with a Regional Discuss matters of a High (EDO) None Director general interest y R.G. 8.8 Rev. 4, "Infor- Reo.uest ACRS/ActW High (RES) R.G. 8.10, " Operation mation Relevant to Ensur- Comments Philosophy for Maintain-

- ing that Occupational ing Occupational Radia-O Radiation Exposures at tion Exposures As low As Nuclear Power Plants will Reasonably Achievable" be As low As Reasonably Achievable" Proposed Revisions to Request ACRS/ActN High (RES) Proposed rule and 10 CFP. 30, 40, 70, and 72 concurrence in staff Regulatory Analysis will on Emergency' Preparedness position be provided on 12/15/92 for Fuel Cycle and Other Radioactive Material Licensees Trends and Patters Status Report Medium (AE00) Brieft.r Package (4/1/92)

Program Plan Implementation of RG 1.97 Status Report low (NRR) Briefing Package (4/1/92) 5

-4 t.73

4 E

January 24, 1990 0

MEMORANDUM FOR: James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations William C. Parler General Counsel Samuel J. Chilk Secretary of the Commission FROM: David C. Williams Inspector General Office of the Inspector General

SUBJECT:

LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY REVIEW REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ,

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL As you know, the Inspector General Act of 1978,- as amended requires the Office of the Inspector General (0!G) to review proposed legislation and regulations relating to agency programs to assess their impact on economy and efficiency.

In conjunction with each of your Offices, the OIG staff established a program to accomplish the above. After seven months of experience with this program, it is clear some refinements are needed.

, First, the list of documents we would like to receive has been reduced to the following:

Office of the Executive _ Director for Ooerations e draft documents having significant impact on NRC policy or program structure (at interoffice coordination stage) e draft Manual Chapters e draft interoffice Memoranda of Understanding a draft NRC comments on regulations proposed by the other federal agencies e draft Executive Orders r6ceived for comment

• draft Interagency Memoranda of Understanding Office of the General Counsel

• 1egislative pr:posals sent for agency review from OMB and the Congress e draft Legislative proposals Office of the Secretary a all SECY papers (two copter)

Please-take steps to essure that the dM monts-your Office is responsibic tur handling or issuiny ;;re sent to the Olb, .4110 wing for a reasonable comment period. We will then lafore the orfginating Office if we will- be providing comments. Every eff6rt will be mde to provide any comments within the same N E Vill-38 EXHIBIT 6

o e

time provided to other offices. Chip Foster will be in contact hith the cog- ,

[

nizant members of your staff to provide any additional information needed to implement this request. l

[ Original signed by) r Davio C. Williams ,

Inspector General Office of the inspector General t

i i

e i

NOV 1992 VIII-39 EXHIBIT 6 "t-t'-' -

, 2. The commitment to public meetings during the licensing p process was reiterated in a Commission Policy Statement on

( recommendations for improving nuclear power plant licensing issued October 19, 1978, 43 FR 49082. See Exhibit 8. It is clear from this policy statement that the open meeting policy is applicable to the time period both prior to, and after, the docketing of a license application.

3. An additional Consission Policy Statement,50 FR 41480, dated October 8,1985, sats forth guidance for the conduct of meetings which involve coordination and exchange of techni-cal information with personnel or organizations generally involved in the study of the nuclear industry. See Exhibit  ;

9.

4. Guidance on requirements for notice of meeting:, and meeting summaries is provided in the Project Manager (PM) Handbook and Office Letters. This guidance generally requires a meeting notice for all meetings between the staff and the applicant. The meetings are oper. to the public to observe, g but not participate.

N 4

5. Staff guidance for interacting with groups not composed 1 strictly of Federal employees was provided in EDO corre-spondence, " Federal Advisory Committee Act " dated February 26. 1988. This guidance was issued to notify staff of the OGC's February 18, 1988 memo regarding Federal Advi-sory Committee Requirements II. See Exhibit 10. Addi-tionally, on July 17, 1989, OGC issued an announcement con-cerning NRC's revised Advisory Committee Regulations (10 CFR Part 7). The OGC announcement provides a review of the major requirements and summarizes the salient provisions of the new regulations. This announcement is also at Exhibit l').

IX-7 O NOV 1992

!!. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES A. Guidance in Recard to DOE /NRC Relationships This guidance was issued by the EDO on July 18, 1986 to establish a policy in regard to the release of information to DOE. See Exhibit 11.

B. Memorandum of Understandina between the Nuclear Reaulatory Commission and the Department of Justice lhe NRC and the D0J entered into a Memorandum of Understanding to provide for coordination of mattert that could lead both to enforce-ment action by the NRC as well as criminal prosecution by D0J, and to facilitate the exchange of information relating to matters within their respective jurisdictions. See Exhibit 12.

C. Memorandum of Understandina Between the Nuclear Reaulatory Comm'ssio' and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration The MOU between NRC and OSHA, effective October 21, 1988, delineates -

the general areas of responsibility of each agency, to describe gen-erally the efforts of the agencies to achieve worker protection at facilities licensed by the NRC, and to provide guidelines for coordi-nation of interface activities between the two agencies. See Exhibit 13.

hk 'd h1 1 IU ? GG c!;%q j!LyiS4ppuct um ,c;

.,1:

• 'a %!aqTON DC ^0SSc I

IX-8 NOV 1992

.